First antibody against COVID-19 spike protein enters phase I

Abstract Background BRII-196 and BRII-198 are human monoclonal antibodies (mAb) with an extended half-life targeting distinct epitopes of the spike protein on SARS-CoV-2. Mutations in these epitope regions are continuously emerging, potentially conferring resistance to COVID-19 therapeutics in development. Individual phase I studies showed that BRII-196 or BRII-198 alone were safe and well tolerated in healthy subjects. The BRII-196 and BRII-198 cocktail is currently under evaluation in Phase 2/3 studies for the treatment of COVID-19. Methods Preclinical study: BRII-196 and BRII-198 were evaluated in the microneutralization assay using pseudo-viruses encoding mutations identified in the spike protein of a panel of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concerns, including strains originating in UK, SA, BR, CA, and India. The fold-change in neutralization IC50 titers relative to wild-type virus was calculated. Phase 1 study: healthy adults received sequential IV BRII-196 and BRII-198 (n=9) or placebo (n=3); and were followed for 180 days. Two dose levels (750mg/750mg and 1500mg/1500mg) were evaluated for safety, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity. Interim analysis results are presented. Results Preclinical: BRII-196 and BRII-198 exhibited neutralizing activity against pseudo-virus variants that contained spike mutations of a panel of variants including B.1.1.7 (UK), B.1.351(SA), P.1(BR), B.1.427/429 (CA), B.1.526 (NY), and B.1.617 (IN), comparable to that against wild-type virus. Phase I study: BRII-196 plus BRII-198 was well tolerated with no dose-limiting adverse events (AEs), deaths, serious adverse events, or infusion reactions. The majority of AEs were isolated asymptomatic grade 1-2 laboratory abnormalities. (Table 1). Each mAb displayed pharmacokinetic characteristics expected of extended half-life YTE-antibodies. Conclusion The BRII-196 and BRII-198 cocktail was well-tolerated, and maintains neutralization against currently reported circulating variants of concern. These preclinical and clinical results support further development of BRII-196 and BRII-198 as a therapeutic or prophylactic option for SARS-CoV-2. Disclosures David A. Margolis, MD MPH, Brii Biosciences (Employee) Yao Zhang, MD, Brii Biosciences (Employee) Yun Ji, PhD, Brii Biosciences (Employee, Shareholder)

Download Full-text

Lead SARS-CoV-2 Candidate Vaccines: Expectations from Phase III Trials and Recommendations Post-Vaccine Approval

Viruses ◽

10.3390/v13010054 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 13 (1) ◽

pp. 54

Author(s):

Ebenezer Tumban

Keyword(s):

Phase I ◽

Geometric Mean ◽

Spike Protein ◽

Phase Iii ◽

The European Union ◽

Angiotensin Converting Enzyme 2 ◽

The United Kingdom ◽

Phase Iii Trials ◽

Antibody Titers ◽

Respiratory Droplets

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is transmitted primarily through respiratory droplets/aerosols and it causes COVID-19. The virus infects epithelial cells by using the spike protein on its surface to bind to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor on the cells. Thus, candidate vaccines targeting the spike protein are currently being developed to prevent against infections. Approximately 44 SARS-CoV-2 candidate vaccines are in clinical trials (phase I–III) and an additional 164 candidates are in preclinical stages. The efficacy data from phase I/II trials of lead candidate vaccines look very promising with virus-neutralizing geometric mean antibody titers in the range of 16.6–3906. Most recently, two SARS-CoV-2 candidate vaccines, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, have been granted the first emergency use authorization (EUA) in the U.S.; BNT162b2 has also been granted an EUA in the United Kingdom, Canada, and in the European Union. This review assesses whether SARS-CoV-2 candidate vaccines (with approved EUA or in phase III trials) meet the criteria for an ideal SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. The review concludes with expectations from phase III trials and recommendations for phase IV studies (post-vaccine approval).

Download Full-text

A Phonomotor Approach to Apraxia of Speech Treatment

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology ◽

10.1044/2020_ajslp-19-00116 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 29 (4) ◽

pp. 2109-2130

Author(s):

Lauren Bislick

Keyword(s):

Phase I ◽

Treatment Effects ◽

Single Case ◽

Motor Planning ◽

The Other ◽

Multimodal Approach ◽

Apraxia Of Speech ◽

Duration Of Treatment ◽

Treatment Gains ◽

Future Work

Purpose This study continued Phase I investigation of a modified Phonomotor Treatment (PMT) Program on motor planning in two individuals with apraxia of speech (AOS) and aphasia and, with support from prior work, refined Phase I methodology for treatment intensity and duration, a measure of communicative participation, and the use of effect size benchmarks specific to AOS. Method A single-case experimental design with multiple baselines across behaviors and participants was used to examine acquisition, generalization, and maintenance of treatment effects 8–10 weeks posttreatment. Treatment was distributed 3 days a week, and duration of treatment was specific to each participant (criterion based). Experimental stimuli consisted of target sounds or clusters embedded nonwords and real words, specific to each participants' deficit. Results Findings show improved repetition accuracy for targets in trained nonwords, generalization to targets in untrained nonwords and real words, and maintenance of treatment effects at 10 weeks posttreatment for one participant and more variable outcomes for the other participant. Conclusions Results indicate that a modified version of PMT can promote generalization and maintenance of treatment gains for trained speech targets via a multimodal approach emphasizing repeated exposure and practice. While these results are promising, the frequent co-occurrence of AOS and aphasia warrants a treatment that addresses both motor planning and linguistic deficits. Thus, the application of traditional PMT with participant-specific modifications for AOS embedded into the treatment program may be a more effective approach. Future work will continue to examine and maximize improvements in motor planning, while also treating anomia in aphasia.

Download Full-text